J. N. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) ADMIT. Service of which is waived by learned Advocate mr. Bhatt on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Leave to delete respondent no. 6 - driver of the bus. In view of the peculiar facts and special circumstances and the urgency in the matters, upon joint request, we have agreed to hear and dispose of the matter on merits since record and proceedings are also available with us. ( 2 ) IN course of hearing of these appeals, our attention was drawn that the original claimants have also preferred appeal No. First Appeal Stamp No. 1501 of 2000 on behalf of the original claimants in First Appeal for enhancement of compensation by learned Advocate Mr. Bhatt. Therefore, upon report from the Registry, the said appeal is also ready and as no office objections are there, we called for hearing of the appeal. Therefore, learned Advocate for the appellant in the First Appeal Mr. Desai appeared for opponents. In the circumstances, first Appeal Stamp No. 1501 of 2000 is also tagged together with the First appeal and both of them are, jointly, heard and since they arise from one and common judgment and award and also accident, upon request they are being disposed of by this common judgment by us. ( 3 ) OBVIOUSLY, both the appeals are filed invoking aids of the provisions of Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the new Act) and both the appellants have challenged the amount of compensation. In First Appeal like that P. A. No. 2381 of 2000 at the instance of the Gujarat state Road Transport Corporation, original opponent in M. A. C. P. No. 206 of 1994 the appellant has challenged the quantum and restricted the challenge to the extent of Rs. 4 lakhs whereas in the second appeal at the instance of the original claimants, they have preferred appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation. However, in appeal it is restricted to Rs. 1,50,000/ -. So the gist of both appeals as arising out of the amount of compensation claimed in m. A. C. P. No. 206 of 1994 filed by the original claimants before the Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Rajkot, claiming an amount of Rs. However, in appeal it is restricted to Rs. 1,50,000/ -. So the gist of both appeals as arising out of the amount of compensation claimed in m. A. C. P. No. 206 of 1994 filed by the original claimants before the Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Rajkot, claiming an amount of Rs. 9,28,950/- for the unfortunate and untimely, death of the main bread-winner of the family, a retired Judicial Officer, one D. T,. Acharya, whose life was cut short at the cruel hands of the providence in a tragic road mishap. The claimants are heirs and legal representatives including widow of the deceased Mr. D. T. Acharya. ( 4 ) THE entire claim is founded upon the tortious act committed by the driver of the S. T. Bus bearing GRZ 6700 belonging to the appellant in First Appeal original opponent. It has been contended that the driver of the said S. T. Bus was responsible for causing unfortunate road accident which occurred on 8-1- 1994 near Panchnath Mahadev Temple in the area of Harihar Chowk at Rajkot, the driver of the S. T. Bus who was in charge of the bus came with excessive speed, driving in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased just in front of footpath when the deceased was walking without knowing that the invitation of death was in the pocket of the driver. As a result of injuries, the deceased sustained serious injuries on various parts of the body in general and on abdomen exterior and interior of the stomach area. The deceased was, violently knocked down. As a result of which he fell on the tar road and sustained grievous injuries. He came to be shifted to the Government hospital. for treatment as ill-luck could have been he breathed his last on account of serious injuries, in course of the treatment in the hospital on 14th day of the happening of the accident. Since the claimants were the dependents and the deceased was the only bread-winner in the family, there came a great tragedy on the family. The claimants, therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition for compensation invoking the provisions of Sec. 166 of the new Act for Rs. 9,28,950/ -. ( 5 ) THE S. T party original opponent Nos. Since the claimants were the dependents and the deceased was the only bread-winner in the family, there came a great tragedy on the family. The claimants, therefore, filed the aforesaid claim petition for compensation invoking the provisions of Sec. 166 of the new Act for Rs. 9,28,950/ -. ( 5 ) THE S. T party original opponent Nos. 1 and 2, the driver and the S. T. Corporation jointly appeared and resisted the claim petition by filing composite written submissions at Exh. 14. inter alia, contending that there was no tortious act or rashness or negligence on the part of the driver of the S. T. Bus involved in the accident, and therefore, they came with the contention that the claimants are not entitled to compensation. ( 6 ) UPON assessment and analysis of the evidence led by the parties and relied on by the Tribunal, the impugned judgment came to be recorded on 8-12-1999 whereby the original claimants came to be awarded consolidated sum of Rs. 6,01,300/- by way of compensation under different recognised heads with interest at the rate of 12% against the claim of Rs. 9,28,950/- holding that the driver of the S. T. Bus involved in the accident was fully accountable for the blame in causing the accident resulting into death, from the date of application till payment. The break-up of the sum of Rs. 6,01,300/- is as follows :-